Recycled Plots (X-Men 3 Revisited)
June 3rd, 2006
Okay, I have to confess first of all that I’ve only ever seen one episode of Buffy, so forgive my ignorance. But I just read a paragraph in an Entertainment Weekly article (commemorating highlights of the WB channel) describing a key Buffy plot point thus:
Buffy “was compelled to slay her great love, Angel, to save the world. At that point, Angel (David Boreanaz) was switching in and out of his evil alter ego, Angelus, representing death and destruction as much as he did allure and romance. At the operatic climax, Buffy and Angel kissed, then she stabbed him in the chest.”
Sound like a certain recent film climax, anyone?
Jillian and Dormouse, you two watched Buffy faithfully. Did it bother you to see the same plot resolution in X-Men 3? Was it okay because it’s a pretty common myth pattern anyway?
Also, I wanted to bring to prominence a comment Dormouse made on the previous X-Men post, because it’s really interesting:
“Also, I really enjoyed the ending of the movie. B/c I felt like it drove home a really key point–mutation cannot be cured, which, in my mind, indicates there’s nothing wrong there to begin with.
Besides, Rogue’s tragedy really compels me, and I hate the idea that she could just cure herself.”
I definitely agree that there’s nothing about the mutants that needs to be cured. But, on the other hand, I felt quite sympathetic with Rogue’s decision. The form her mutancy took was, to her, more heartbreak than benefit (she can’t touch people she cares about AND she doesn’t have any other powers that work at a distance). Now I can see why you would be upset with her decision if you’re viewing mutancy as a parallel to homosexuality. But what about if you think of it as a parallel to disability? Take a deaf person. Now there’s nothing “wrong” there, either, nothing that makes that individual less than a person. But what if that individual chooses to have a cochlear implant? Some in the deaf community would never want cochlear implants, because they cherish the particularity of that community, including communicating through sign language. And I don’t think people who get cochlear implants are necessarily saying there’s anything wrong with being deaf–they’re simply making a choice about how they want to live their lives.
Of course, Rogue’s decision isn’t about either homosexuality or disability, and yet it’s about both, as well as a whole host of other issues. I do like the complexity of the questions the film raises, how the same question may look different through different angles.
However, given the wiggling chessman at the end of the film, I think we might surmise that Rogue’s “cure” won’t be permanent anyway.
Entry Filed under: Movies
3 Comments Add your own
1. Dormouse | June 4th, 2006 at 12:06 am
Yeah, the Buffy/X3 parallel isn’t so much there. B/c Buffy was prepared to kill Angelus–who was really and truly one of the single most evil characters on that series. And then, at the key moment, Angel’s soul was restored, and Angelus was once again gone. But Buffy had to kill him anyway, b/c the world depended on it.
Plus, what Logan and Jean had–not much, really–hardly compares to Buffy and Angel. Angel was her first love in every way, and in many ways the great love of her life. I don’t doubt the depth or reality of Logan’s feelings for Jean, but it wasn’t really mutual, and, unlike Angel, Jean *wanted* to die.
I can totally see Rogue’s condition as a disability–in many ways, it IS. And I fully understand and even support her decision, as someone who loves the character and wants her to be happy. My objections are from a purely storytelling standpoint–it’s a better story if Rogue can’t ever touch anyone, you know? Just like, with Angel and Buffy, it’s a better story in part b/c they can never (again) consummate their relationship. (That’s how Angel lost his soul in the first place, you see.)
Also, she eventually develops the power to fly (I think after she kills someone with her power, but don’t quote me on that). I always was rather intrigued by Rogue’s “gift”/curse.
2. theotter | June 4th, 2006 at 11:13 am
Yep, definitely intriguing, because no matter which way she decides, there’s something lost. As someone unfamiliar with the larger X-Men world, I saw her decision as something like that of Arwen in Lord of the Rings or Eilonwy in the Prydain Chronicles, characters (and I know you haven’t read the latter, but Eilonwy is more of a character–and I trust you will read Lloyd Alexander one day, because face it, you can’t resist the call of the oracular pig) who give up something of their powers to be with the men they love. Now, I really hope that Rogue wasn’t giving up her mutancy for Bobby, because, really, Bobby? C’mon. I viewed it as more generally giving up her powers to be able to know human touch once again. But there’s still definitely a sense of loss.
Porpoise seconds you on your memory about Rogue permanently absorbing another character’s power after she (accidentally?) kills him.
Glad to know that there are differences between the Buffy and the X-Men situations.
3. Jillian | June 4th, 2006 at 10:30 pm
Agreeing with everyone else: Rogue took on the powers of Ms. Marvel–thus being able to fly and having incredible strength. Ms. Marvel, being a decidedly less interesting character, was in a coma for ages and ages until they decided they needed to have a Ms. Marvel/Rogue show down.
It actually was quite shocking in the first movie to find a pre-Ms.Marvel-Rogue and that they continued with only her original powers for so long. Rogue was already a extra-superpowered dame by the time I was reading comics. Of course, I was sort of hoping they would reveal that Rogue’s adopted “Mama” was none other than Raven/Mystique who is really Nightcrawler’s biological mother making Rogue/Nightcrawler sort of siblings… except, well, that would be quite a lot to show on the screen. *chuckles*
Now, if Rogue can only find that one pre-historic bit in the Antarctic where mutant powers are neutralized and she can go native and fall in love with Magneto. Seriously. I’m not joking.
Regarding Bobby/Rogue… I was surprised they brought that into the movies actually. Bobby has had a huge crush on Rogue in the comics (well back when I read them) but Rogue would never give him the time of day as she was already smitten with a certain Remy LeBeau. (Can I just add how deliciously amused I am that Multiple Man made it into the movies and Gambit (Remy) didn’t?!) I’ve always been very sympathetic to Bobby/Rogue because Bobby didn’t have a chance… so seeing it in the movies was a little bit of fangirl ’squee’ for Jillian.
Hmm. But about the Buffy/Logan finale parallels… I can’t say that they’re much alike. *shrugs* Then again, I’m a trained comic fan who never really believes that the X-Men can stay dead. Killing Jean twice? Not a big deal… I’m sure Mr. Sinister has a clone in stock.
Actually, I’m reading one comic series currently, the revived X-Factor (Jamie!), and they’re making a lovely plot twist out of the ‘X-Men don’t stay dead’ phenomena… one of the characters was just told that her X-Man father died heroically and she’s in serious denial because, “He’ll be back. They all come back.”
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed